Karnataka High Court Weekly Roundup: October 13 - October 19, 2025

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 342 to 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 353Nominal Index:M/S. ANNAPURNESHWARI MINERALS AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 342R D Chaitra AND Directorate of Enforcement. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 343GNANESHWARA M AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 344THE JOINT DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT AND M/S DEVAS MULTIMEDIA PVT LTD. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 345Prathap Simha AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 346M/S JET AIRWAYS (INDIA) PVT LTD V SRI PRASHANT RAO. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 347RADHAMMA AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 348SRI. ADRUSHYA KADESHWARA SWAMIJI GURU MUPPINA KADESHWARA SWAMJI AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 349The Canara Bank v. The State of Karnataka. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 350OLIVE LIFESCIENCES PRIVATE LIMITED v UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 351Principal Commissioner of Customs v. M/s Pigeon International. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 352EMBASSY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED Versus ITI LIMITED. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 353Judgments/OrdersIf Last Day For Renewal Of Quarry Lease Falls On Public Holiday, Application Can Be Made On Following Day: Karnataka High CourtCase Title: M/S. ANNAPURNESHWARI MINERALS AND State of Karnataka & ANRCase No: WRIT PETITION NO.265 OF 2021Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 342The Karnataka High Court has said that an application for renewal of the license of quarry lease can be made on the last day of the expiry period upto midnight and if the last day is a public holiday, then it can be made on the following day.A division bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice C M Joshi held thus while allowing a petition filed by M/s Annapurneshwari Minerals who had approached the court challenging the order dated 13.08.2020 passed by the Joint Director and Revision Authority, Department of Mines and Geology, South Zone, Mysuru. The rejection was in terms of Rule 28 of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994.Karnataka High Court Rejects Plea Seeking Release Of Congress MLA KC Veerendra Arrested In 'Illegal Betting' CaseCase Title: R D Chaitra AND Directorate of EnforcementCase No: WP 26754/2025Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 343The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday (October 15) dismissed the petition filed by wife of Congress MLA KC Veerendra for declaring his arrest in an alleged illegal betting case under PMLA as illegal, arbitrary and violative of his fundamental rights and to release him.Justice MI Arun said, "It is only on the ground that one FIR is alive in which 'B' report is filed that allows them (ED) to proceed."Observations made herein above are in relation to case in hand and if petitioner were to make any application for bail the same would be considered by the court in accordance with law. If the 'B' report were to be accepted by the trial court in FIR no...petitioner would be at liberty to make necessary application for quashing of proceedings against him" the court said.'No Merit': Karnataka High Court Dismisses PIL Seeking To Correct Placement Of Words 'Satyamev Jayate' In State EmblemCase Title: GNANESHWARA M AND State of Karnataka & OthersCase No: WP 26229/2025Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 344The Karnataka High Court on Thursday dismissed a PIL seeking directions to the State to review and correct the Karnataka State Emblem and ensure full compliance of State Emblem of India (Prohibition Of Improper Use) Act, 2005.A division bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice C M Poonacha dismissed the petition filed by one Gnaneshwara M, seeking to ensure that the script 'Satyameva Jayate' is placed in its "correct statutory position" in the State Emblem, as prescribed in Appendix I and II of the 2005 Act.The Court however, on going through the records and averments, observed, “The contention that use of the Karnataka State Emblem falls foul with Section 3 of the State Emblem Act, 2005. We find no merit in the aforesaid contention. Petition is accordingly dismissed.”PMLA Tribunal Cannot Remand Back Order Of Attachment Passed By Adjudicating Authority For Fresh Consideration: Karnataka High CourtCase Title: THE JOINT DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT AND M/S DEVAS MULTIMEDIA PVT LTD.Case No: MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL NO. 24 OF 2020Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 345The Karnataka High Court has held that the Appellate Tribunal under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act has no power to remand back to consider afresh the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority, confirming the provisional attachment order.A division bench of Justice D K Singh and Justice Venkatesh Naik T allowed the appeal filed by the Enforcement Directorate and said “Tribunal is creation of the Statute and it exercises limited power as conferred on it, by the Statute. There is no inherent power in a Tribunal, inasmuch as the Tribunal is not a regular Court. If the Statute does not confer a power of remand, and there is no inherent power vested in the Tribunal, it cannot remand the matter back to the...

Karnataka High Court Weekly Roundup: October 13 - October 19, 2025

Mustafa Plumber

Tags